Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Term:

Settings

Beginner Intermediate Advanced No DefinitionsDefinition Life:

All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Comments

I don't think it's going to be all that difficult, at least for the next 15 to 20 years when the reductions in CO2 emissions won't be that big. Getting all the way down to zero will be tough, but that's not until what, 2070?

I just looked at my latest electric bill. Only 1.95% came from wind, and solar was only 0.05%. Both of those could easily be upped by a factor of ten over the next 5 to 10 years. Add in 10% efficiency improvements with better appliances and better insulated houses and buildings and you already have a significant reduction, without any new inventions or noticable financial pain.

I've seen these articles that CO2 reductions will be very difficult, but I would argue that we don't really know that because we haven't really tried in any serious way.

I had a look at the quotations of scientists and newspapers in the final link above. With one exception, they are all quite reasonable and sensible. The exception is the Wall Street Journal of 14 December 2015. The final sentence of the quotation is enough to evoke homicidal feelings:

The grandiose claims of triumph in Paris represent the self-interest of a political elite that wants more control over the private economy in the U.S. and around the world.

To this my riposte is:

The insensate rejection of science by the Wall Street Journal represents the self-interest of a corporate elite that wants more control over national governance in the US and around the world.

On the one hand, there are the dire consequences of unmitigated climate change. On the other hand, there is the propaganda campaign certain corporations and individuals have waged to sabotage any action designed to avert such change. The item from the Wall Street Journal is an example.

It is difficult to conceive of people so evil that they are willing to countenance the destruction of the planetary environment in the long-term — and human civilization with it — simply to maintain their wealth and power in the short-term.

I hope the foregoing does not constitute a "political" or "ad-hominem" comment. We are after all talking about people trying to stop others from averting a catastrophic future climate. If my language seems too strong, I refer readers to the above-mentioned "homicidal feelings".

00

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.